Edmund S. Phelps defines the variations on one theme - the American Dream. There is no absolute idea of an American Dream, because its lies within the eyes of the beholder. Each individual has his/her personal fulfilment, driven by motivation. A dream comes true when a goal is achieved, but not everyone has the desire to pursue further goals. There are many facets of an American Dream. The mainstream trend is said to be the constant pursuit of material prosperity, that affords a shopping spree - big houses, nice cars, expensive goods etc. - to boost one's ego and to impress friends and neighbours. This mentality of "Keeping up with the Joneses" reminds of Abraham Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs represented in a pyramid with five levels, each of which has to be satisfied before the desire for the next kicks in. If the American dream is defined by the opportunity to achieve, many Americans think it is drifting further away. For "America's deprived" it has become out of reach. This is where John Rawls made his point in his theory of "justice as fairness" that describes a society of free citizens holding equal basic rights and cooperating within an egalitarian economic system. The political philosopher died in 2002. Were he still alive today, he would understand why many white working class Americans voted for Trump last year. Many believe that mobility is key to success. If they are willing to go where opportunity is and acquire the skills that the job market requires, they can move forward much easier than most could during the Great Depression. Between 1950s and 1960s America's economy boomed thanks to strong manufacturing, and low-skill workers had no problem finding employment. Today - without skills - working the way to the top would be difficult. The problem is that success has sometimes more to do with luck than a long, hard slog. It doesn't help trudging forward and fighting for opportunity, no matter what happens, in the absence of fabourable circumstances. The author says, what made the American Dream "distinctive" was not material gains but "the hope of achieving things, with all that that entails: drawing on one’s personal knowledge, trusting one’s intuition, venturing into the unknown" - self actualisation. He names several examples of how things were done " may have mattered more than the success" itself. Perhaps is the learning process that is more gratifying than the reward. In June 2015 Trump said: "Sadly the American dream is dead. But if I get elected president, I will bring it back bigger and better and stronger than ever before and we will make America great again." He fueled resentment among his supporters, who believed the globalised economy had passed them by. They struggled with stagnant wages and falling living standards. The promise of their American dream had remained unfulfilled. Trump's victory was seen as a tribute to his knack for understanding people's discontent, and channelling it.The author says: Of course, dreaming of success could not have been widespread – a national phenomenon – had working Americans not had an economy that gave participants the freedom to be enterprising: to try new ways and conceive new things. And dreams of success could not have become as widespread as they did had Americans not perceived that they could succeed regardless of their national origin and their social status." Indeed, the pioneer settlers were the true embodiment of the American Dream. They pulled west because they wanted to make a better living and the opportunity to buy land.The author points out the essence of the American dream, which may not be what most Americans embrace - "Observing that enterprise, exploration, and creation could be engaging, even engrossing, and deeply gratifying." Make "working in businesses, from rural areas to cities, as a path to the Good Life. And that life’s rewards were not just money. To suppose that money was their focus – even in their dreams – is to miss what was distinctive in American life." This is a tall order for many Americans to fill. Many feel miserable and scared, even though they don't have the reason to be. In fact the best dream is one that can't be bought or fulfilled with money.

Very nicely put, J. VON HETTLINGEN Sep 3, 2017There is enough goodness in America that anyone can live a satisfied and fulfilled life. As evidenced by many, many rag to riches tales, or at least a decent life and fulfillment. But it isn't handed to anyone on a platter, it takes self knowledge, introspection, up bringing with values of responsibility, self control, charity, ambition, and understanding. Family, education, and society can support some of that, but the dream has to come from within. And necessarily, not everyone can succeed as well as they would.

Most of the associations that make up the "American Dream" are universal aspirations. In particular, the great intangible - the element of "freedom", is not at all unique to the US.

Maybe two things stands out in my mind as typically "American" - and at their best, they can take the universal elements of "the dream" and add a particular flavor of heroic and hopeful quality to it. To me, they are (1) the faith in individualism, specifically, as a vehicle for achieving "the universal dream" (2) a faith that each generation really has a chance for a fresh start and overcoming whatever obstacles may be in their way.

But both of these are only partial claims, there are tons of exceptions. To the first, a great many collectivist subcultures woven into the national character - and so many concrete examples of "progress" in national life leveraged that exception - and if you look at countries around the world that have in actual fact achieved a better version of the dream, they are especially likely to have blended individualist and collectivist values.

Anyway much of this all is a cocktail of mythology and marketing. One can believe in the American dream or the universal dream all you want, but in practice, it means for the lower and middle class, working hard, buying a house in the suburbs, spending 2 hours a day in a car, making the same trip again and again and again. (mass transit? that's for the commies!). For the top 20%, it means training your kids from a young age for vicious competition, and simultaneously doing anything to preserve a positive attitude and a safe distance from the ugly realities.

I think it is this last part which is made fun of by people outside the US sometimes - and also what Hunter S. Thompson latched on to with his unique sense of humor. (A Mark Twain of the 70's, in his own way?).

The American dream is necessarily vague, since it has to simultaneously have meaning to classes at opposites end of the pecking order. If you did the classic "Venn diagram" exercise, drawing circles representing the way the dream looks from a pair of such opposite-end viewpoints, and if you watched how those circles moved over, say, the last 40 years... how would that animation look? When people say the "death" of the American Dream, they mean the circles are moving apart. Is that true? For the material aspirations people have, and the aspiration for security and better life for their kids - of course not, the circles overlap. But as I said earlier, those those aren't the uniquely American elements. Leave them out of the analysis. For the specifically "American" elements of the American dream, the more intangible, non-material, ideal... that unity of vision is getting pretty shaky.

The "American Dream" has meant many different things, but to conclude that it had nothing to do with bettering one's economic status is to ignore history. Perhaps the author should re-read Horatio Alger.

Sorry Ed, but while you were snoozing in the hammock under your copy of 'Tom Swift Electrifies the Garden of Earthly Delights', villains convinced everyone else that capitalism was about money and power, and that financialization, regulatory capture, unpayable oceans of public and private debt, and the systematic exploitation of the moronic middle incapable of intellectual honesty gave meaning to American life. You snooze, you lose, as they say.

Throughout history a cull of the population through pestilence, plague and war has always appeared to grant the survivors a better situation. WW3 is scheduled to be economic, cyber or robotic, so there will be no causalities in that sense

New Comment

Pin comment to this paragraph

After posting your comment, you’ll have a ten-minute window to make any edits. Please note that we moderate comments to ensure the conversation remains topically relevant. We appreciate well-informed comments and welcome your criticism and insight. Please be civil and avoid name-calling and ad hominem remarks.

Log in/Register

Please log in or register to continue. Registration is free and requires only your email address.

Log in

Register

Emailrequired

PasswordrequiredRemember me?

Please enter your email address and click on the reset-password button. If your email exists in our system, we'll send you an email with a link to reset your password. Please note that the link will expire twenty-four hours after the email is sent. If you can't find this email, please check your spam folder.